Jump to content

Custom Search





Coming Up Next:
Lincoln Aviator


Welcome to Blue Oval Forums


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to Blue Oval Forums.  You must first register to create topics and post replies. Registration is a quick and easy process and only takes a minute.  Be apart of Blue Oval Forums by signing in or creating an account.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create a photo album and post images
  • Use the Shout feature and more. . .
Click here to create an account now.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Wards calls out Ecoboost


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   blazerdude20

blazerdude20

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 2,212 posts
  • Joined 11-May 07
  • Location:metro portland

Posted 07 January 2015 - 10:07 PM

http://www.autoblog....mplaints-wards/

"Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list."

16a4321d-9484-4a17-a605-6aed162cd9a5.jpg3a666047-e4ad-4885-92c9-b4265da68c0a.jpg








Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#2 OFFLINE   RichardJensen

RichardJensen

    Does whatever a SpiderPig does

  • Moderator
  • 35,277 posts
  • Joined 02-September 04
  • Location:Sioux Falls, SD
  • Current Vehicle:2000 Mercury Sable

Posted 07 January 2015 - 10:29 PM

That's a bit of an about-face from a media outlet that praised the 3.5L and 2.0L EB engines for their efficiency.


  • Hugh and bdegrand like this

photo-thumb-15254.jpg


#3 OFFLINE   JasonM

JasonM

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 344 posts
  • Joined 11-February 06

Posted 07 January 2015 - 11:31 PM

Lol, love this part of the Ward's article.  Pretty much sums it up.

 

 

"The EPA says this engine should get 26 mpg (9 L/100 km) on the highway with 2-wheel drive. Our 4x4 supercab never got close to that, even under a light foot."

 

Why would Ward's state that a 4x4 drivetrain rated at 18/20/23 mpg is supposed to get the same EPA mileage as the 4x2 version?


Edited by JasonM, 07 January 2015 - 11:49 PM.

  • bdegrand likes this

#4 OFFLINE   JasonM

JasonM

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 344 posts
  • Joined 11-February 06

Posted 07 January 2015 - 11:47 PM

That's a bit of an about-face from a media outlet that praised the 3.5L and 2.0L EB engines for their efficiency.

 

Indeed, and even awarded both the 3.5L EB and 2.0L EB engines 10 Best Awards.


Edited by JasonM, 07 January 2015 - 11:47 PM.

  • bdegrand likes this

#5 OFFLINE   Hugh

Hugh

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined 24-April 06
  • Region:Canada British Columbia
  • Location:Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
  • Current Vehicle:2014 Ford Escape Titanium AWD, 2004 Ford Ranger XLT

Posted 07 January 2015 - 11:57 PM

So, who got to Wards first? Seriously, the article is borderline insane. So are the comments on Autoblog. First moaning how you need 93 octane for the power, not getting the Fuel economy when you forget what wheel drive you have. Wards team must have had a brain tumor for breakfast. The work from them is usually good but this is an about face in the most blatant and terrible way. Good grief! 


Edited by Hugh, 08 January 2015 - 12:06 AM.

  • Stray Kat, akirby and bdegrand like this

photo-thumb-15254.jpg

 

READY AYE READY "ONE NAVY"

Former Vehicles:
1993 Mercury Topaz GS Maroon ext. - Grey 'Mouse Fur' int. (Vulcan and 3A) AKA 'Thunder Topaz' 1999-2010
2011 Ford Fiesta SES Monteray Grey ext. - Black Leather w/ Oatmeal stitching int. (HB and 6A) AKA 'Little Car' 2010 - 2012

2002 Ford Taurus SES Sport Black ext. - Medium Stone 'Mouse Fur' int. AKA 'Ferdinand the Bull ' 2012-2014


#6 OFFLINE   ANTAUS

ANTAUS

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,838 posts
  • Joined 22-November 99
  • Location:Orlando, FL

Posted 08 January 2015 - 12:23 AM

Well this isn't the first story of it's kind.  Just about every publication has harped about the Ecoboosts not getting the claimed numbers.  They haven't mentioned any other automakers numbers, but the aura that the Ecoboost are thirsty engines are out there.  Im wondering how my fuel mileage would be on these engines since I'm certainly not light footed by any means. I have always averaged 12-14MPG on the LS and 13-15 on the MKX.  But I think asking people to drive like an old lady to achieve the EPA estimates is laughable.

 

I should have my one of my friends with a Mustang GT  (who averages 20MPG cause he drives like an old lady-Yes midlife crisis he can barely afford) try one of these Ecoboost and see if he can even reach those numbers.



#7 OFFLINE   Hugh

Hugh

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined 24-April 06
  • Region:Canada British Columbia
  • Location:Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
  • Current Vehicle:2014 Ford Escape Titanium AWD, 2004 Ford Ranger XLT

Posted 08 January 2015 - 12:36 AM

Don't know, as I said in another thread, I'm reaching as advertised fuel economy. Can't speak for others but consider this: If an EB15 got equal to better power and fuel economy then the D25, mission success. An EB20 vs a D30. An EB35 vs Boss 6.2L....that's my train of thought and I do believe that is conveyed enough. 


photo-thumb-15254.jpg

 

READY AYE READY "ONE NAVY"

Former Vehicles:
1993 Mercury Topaz GS Maroon ext. - Grey 'Mouse Fur' int. (Vulcan and 3A) AKA 'Thunder Topaz' 1999-2010
2011 Ford Fiesta SES Monteray Grey ext. - Black Leather w/ Oatmeal stitching int. (HB and 6A) AKA 'Little Car' 2010 - 2012

2002 Ford Taurus SES Sport Black ext. - Medium Stone 'Mouse Fur' int. AKA 'Ferdinand the Bull ' 2012-2014


#8 OFFLINE   zipnzap

zipnzap

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 356 posts
  • Joined 08-May 08

Posted 08 January 2015 - 05:07 AM

 

3.2L Power Stroke diesel I-5: The massive Transit van uses this engine, and anyone needing to move a storeful of refrigerators will find it outstanding. It’s reasonably quiet, considering the inside of this truck is like a drum.

Perhaps it wasn’t fair comparing it with the Ram diesel, which clearly is designed for passenger duty. The Transit I-5 delivered admirable fuel economy for a truck this size, averaging 19 mpg (12.3 L/100 km).

 

Wait. Where's the "dressing down"?  :headscratch:

 

 

 

...although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines.

 

I'm not seeing this either.  :headscratch:



#9 OFFLINE   traxiii

traxiii

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined 17-September 09
  • Location:Nor Cal
  • Current Vehicle:2004 Mustang 40th Anniversary V6 Coupe

Posted 08 January 2015 - 05:12 AM

I wish I could get the rated MPG out of my EB20 Edge. I'm lucky to get 18 city and 25 highway (it's rated 21 and 30mpg). I do drive fast on Interstate 5 for most of my Hwy. driving, (75 to 80mph) but I really drive it easy around town trying to use the cruise and coasting as much as I can, but find that it just doesn't like stop and go at all. I have friends that get the same mileage as me with their 3.5L N/A's.


  • Hydro likes this

#10 OFFLINE   Dave-S

Dave-S

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 356 posts
  • Joined 24-September 14
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • Location:Upstate South Carolina
  • Current Vehicle:2014 Ford Fusion - Ruby Red

Posted 08 January 2015 - 05:36 AM

The real proof of the pudding comes from customers. Are customers claiming that they get poor gas mileage? (I do not know),

 

All I know is my 1.5L in my Fusion deliver's better than the EPA rating fuel mileage in both city and highway driving. It also gets better fuel mileage then my previous car which was a 2012 Hyundai Sonata without a turbo. So this is one customer on the positive side of the fuel mileage ledger.



#11 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 08 January 2015 - 06:59 AM

About the only thing I find "odd" from Ward's is 

The problem with this new Mustang engine is that it doesn’t sound like it belongs in a pony car.


So that out weights

Compelling technologies include a twin-scroll low-inertia turbocharger (a first for Ford) and high-pressure fuel injectors with six holes laser-drilled to help atomize spray into the combustion chamber.


AND
 

The 2.3L EcoBoost goes hard when called upon, capable of a 60-mph (97 km/h) sprint in 5.2 seconds and a top speed of 145 mph (233 km/h).



#12 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,161 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 08 January 2015 - 07:15 AM

Lol, love this part of the Ward's article.  Pretty much sums it up.
 
 
"The EPA says this engine should get 26 mpg (9 L/100 km) on the highway with 2-wheel drive. Our 4x4 supercab never got close to that, even under a light foot."
 
Why would Ward's state that a 4x4 drivetrain rated at 18/20/23 mpg is supposed to get the same EPA mileage as the 4x2 version?

The real "take away" should be how the EB2.7L is "optimized" for a given "typical" load. Actually this is true for ALL EcoBoost engines !   In order to get "good" fuel economy with ANY EcoBoost engine, requires a light foot AND a light load.


I would really like to see some "real world" data of a F150 2WD SuperCab towing a 3,000-5,000 lbs trailer, 2.7L EB versus a 5.0L. I suspect the fuel economy difference will be very small.


Edited by theoldwizard, 08 January 2015 - 07:16 AM.


#13 OFFLINE   Anthony

Anthony

    Voice of reason

  • Moderator
  • 5,179 posts
  • Joined 08-May 01
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:CT
  • Current Vehicle:2014 Focus Hatch

Posted 08 January 2015 - 08:28 AM

I think anytime you put "ECO" in the name of your product, fuel economy will automatically be a target for reviewers above anything else.
  • papilgee4evaeva and twintornados like this

#14 ONLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,707 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 08 January 2015 - 08:46 AM

I think it's a herd mentality from so-called journalists who seem to just parrot what everyone else is saying rather than having their own independent opinions or doing their own research.  Bad news gets a lot more publicity than good news these days.


  • Hugh and 97svtgoin05gt like this

2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)

#15 OFFLINE   twintornados

twintornados

    Ford fan for a long, long time.

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,146 posts
  • Joined 16-February 10
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Central NY
  • Current Vehicle:2011 Lincoln MKX Elite

Posted 08 January 2015 - 08:58 AM

I think anytime you put "ECO" in the name of your product, fuel economy will automatically be a target for reviewers above anything else.

Maybe Ford should've stuck with "Twinforce"??


  • ironhorse, Hydro and papilgee4evaeva like this
Does anyone know where the love of god goes, when the waves turn the minutes to hours....Gordon Lightfoot, "Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald"

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. ~ Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974

#16 OFFLINE   ironhorse

ironhorse

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 556 posts
  • Joined 24-October 00

Posted 08 January 2015 - 10:12 AM

The ecoboost engine family is so misunderstood...the engines will get mileage if you drive them to get good mileage... If you drive them for power,mileage will suffer.

 

 Many customers and the media expected Ford to have an engine that developed high HP and torque and high MPG...AT THE SAME TIME...that expectation should have been quelled.



#17 ONLINE   fuzzymoomoo

fuzzymoomoo

    Blue Oval Enthusiast

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,557 posts
  • Joined 18-February 14
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Southeast Michigan
  • Current Vehicle:2008 Focus, 2015 Focus

Posted 08 January 2015 - 10:15 AM

The ecoboost engine family is so misunderstood...the engines will get mileage if you drive them to get good mileage... If you drive them for power,mileage will suffer.
 
 Many customers and the media expected Ford everyone to have an engine that developed high HP and torque and high MPG...AT THE SAME TIME...that expectation should have been quelled.


FTFY

What? What happened?


#18 OFFLINE   aneekr

aneekr

    Plain Old Dood

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,830 posts
  • Joined 10-January 07
  • Region:U.S. Great Lakes
  • Location:Indianapolis
  • Current Vehicle:none

Posted 08 January 2015 - 10:33 AM

I think it's a herd mentality from so-called journalists who seem to just parrot what everyone else is saying rather than having their own independent opinions or doing their own research. 

 

In this case, Ward's did their own evaluation and research of Ford vehicles equipped with 1.0L, 1.5L, and 2.7L EcoBoost engines, and they arrived at the same conclusions that other independent reviewers did: with the exception of the 1.0L 3-cylinder, EcoBoost engines fall short when it comes to real-world fuel efficiency. 

 

Kudos to Ward's for not simply rehashing press releases from Ford Motor Company this time around.


Ford Motor Company investor since 2000. Cancer survivor since 2014!


#19 OFFLINE   Tracy Lawson

Tracy Lawson

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Facebook Member
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Joined 09-December 14

Posted 08 January 2015 - 10:41 AM

Its just like any motor you can't lead pedal them if you want good numbers



#20 ONLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 25,707 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Alpharetta, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2013 Fusion Ti (Ruby Red)

Posted 08 January 2015 - 10:43 AM

Does "real world" include all the drivers who get at or above the EPA ratings on ecoboost vehicles?  Or does it only include those who fit your preconceived opinion?



2013 Fusion Titanium (Ruby Red)
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)








Custom Search


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy Terms of Service ·